Mumbai: A 54-year-old woman Aparna Soni, who claims that BJP’s Gorakhpur MP Ravi Kishan is the father of her daughter, approached the Bombay high court on Saturday to quash an FIR lodged against her by Kishan’s wife Preeti Shukla at Lucknow’s Hazratganj police station.
Shukla had accused Aparna, also known as Aparna Thakur, of demanding ₹20 crore by threatening to falsely accuse Ravi Kishan of rape.
In the writ petition, filed through advocate Ashok M Saraogi, Aparna, along with her husband Rajesh Soni and 25-year-old daughter Shinova, who are also named in the FIR, contended that the offence, registered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including 120B (criminal conspiracy), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), and 506 (criminal intimidation), is based on false allegations and lacks merit.
Thakur argues that the FIR is a result of malafide intentions and an abuse of the legal process. They contend that the notice issued by Thakur to Ravi Kishan, asserting the biological relationship between him and Shinova, does not amount to extortion or any criminal offence. Furthermore, they assert that the FIR has been registered in Lucknow, although the parties involved reside primarily in Mumbai, indicating a lack of jurisdiction.
Also Read | Ravi Kishan’s wife Preeti Shukla files an FIR against woman claiming to be his wife: ‘She demanded Rs. 20 crores’
According to Thakur’s legal team, the FIR is an attempt to silence her and her family from asserting Shinova’s rights as the biological daughter of Ravi Kishan. They highlight that Thakur had initiated legal proceedings in the City Civil Court at Dindoshi, Mumbai, seeking a declaration of Shinova’s rights.
In the suit, she has urged the court to declare she is the biological daughter of actor-politician Kishan, born out of his relationship with Aparna Soni. Thakur’s plea argues that the FIR is an act of retaliation against this legal action.
Aparna requested the Bombay high court to quash the FIR, arguing that it lacks substance and is an abuse of the legal process. She also seeks a stay on further proceedings related to the FIR pending the court’s decision. The court is likely to hear both the paternity matter and the quashing of FIR matter in its next session this week.
Credit: Source link